Yes morality is subject but you could say that about anything. The topic was originally about humanity and yes we have open up many other avenues from it, but at what point is it mere selfishness to presume that humans attempting to adjust nature at its most basic level (life and death cycle) not normal? It's nothing more than self-preservation in one form or another, yet if you look at so many other areas of mankind it all undermines not only nature, but our place and existence in it.
"Man's destiny was to conquer and rule the world, and this is what he's done.. almost. He hasn't quite made it, and it looks as though this may be his undoing. The problem is that man's conquest of the world has itself devastated the world. And in spite of all the mastery we've attained, we don't have enough mastery to stop devastating the world.. or to repair the devastation we've already wrought."— Daniel Quinn
Who are you to say what is abnormal for nature??? We are apart of nature, life cycle, balance of life. Whatever we do is part of nature, just because its not primitive does not mean its abnormal. And the gap is huge, you just refuse to look at the good mankind is providing you.
[/quote]
Since morality is subjective.[/quote]
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
I think a lot of times it has to do with their supposed future earning capacity. (This guy worked, but only for minimum wage.) Of course, after I gave my deposition about what a great friend he was (they asked me to be a character witness) and I accidentally started crying, they settled. And this had nothing to do with his future earning capacity.
Again, it's all relative. And I think what it's often relative to is the (financial) interests of the person assessing value.
huh, i never really thought about that aspect. when i talked about sometimes people devaluing others, i was kind of thinking about the way human life tends to be de-valued to justify the death penalty. in that sense, the future earnings arguement is kind of ironic as it generally costs more to execute someone.
Future earning potential isn't the only way the economic value of human life is calculated. I think this is mostly used when deciding what the payout should be in the case of wrongfull death.
Another way involves asking people what they would be willing to pay to reduce their risk of death, for instance. These kinds of calculations inform cost-benefit analyses that are used to determine what safety measures companies must take to protect their workers, for instance. Once you start getting into a situation where the safety measures would cost more to implement than the economic value of the lives they would save, then they say the safety measures are not justified. (I'm sure that's quite comforting to the families of the people who die.)
the strongest eat until they are full, and give the weakest the scraps...how is that different?
They still only take what they can use. They don't stockpile a surplus of antelope for themselves, that they'll never be able to eat, while most of the rest of their species starves.
huh, i never really thought about that aspect. when i talked about sometimes people devaluing others, i was kind of thinking about the way human life tends to be de-valued to justify the death penalty.
...
Yes... people are de-valued in order to make it easier treat them as animals, rather than humans.
During wartime... the enemy is reduced to a sub-human evil... it justifies killing them.
And we do not need to looks any further than our own southern border to see an example of this.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
... Has any animal other than us protected other animals from extinction? I would say we are much better.
i find this interesting. why does this make people better??? i dont see saving species from extinction as being an inherently good thing. humans destroy environments and then go about 'rescuing' species they have forced to the brink of extinction. why do they do this? why do they even feel the need to do this???
Your basically punishing Humans because they are smart and are able to survive without living the hunter / gathering life style. Saving species shows that we value life. We destroy enviroments to survive and to be able to live a life without fear not being able to survive. I am not saying thats a good thing but you seem to spout bad of humans while your living your coushy lifestyle (typing on the computer / internet service) Life isnt fair and i am disgusted with alot of decisions humans make but we evolved to a point where we don't have to worry about day to day survival, but this also comes at the cost of using alot of resources from the eath that have harmful effects on the ecosystem.
im not punishing humans. i dont even hate humans.. some of my favourite people are humans...im just asking questions. humans are not smart, humans have intelligence. theres a difference. quite often the decisions they make have enormous repercussions that im not sure they quite understand. we do not destroy the environment to survive, we do it cause we can and because we dont know how to stop. we see no other way of living than that which weve been using since we discovered agriculture. we produce to excess, not just what is required to survive. if you think inventing weaponry and continuing all our other destructive ways even after we know theyre destructive is progress then i suggest your reasoning is unsound.
and i disagree... saving species does not show we value life... it shows weve realised how destructive we are and were now looking for a way to somehow redeem ourselves for our actions. its like recycling... its just to make ourselves feel good whilst we continue to destroy the planet. a band aid if you will. if humans valued life, i mean truly valued life then wed live in eternal peace. dont fool yourself, humans are animals, were just a breed apart.
Post edited by catefrances on
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
The whole world will be different soon... - EV
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
im not punishing humans. i dont even hate humans.. some of my favourite people are humans...im just asking questions. humans are not smart, humans have intelligence. theres a difference. quite often the decisions they make have enormous repercussions that im not sure they quite understand. we do not destroy the environment to survive, we do it cause we can and because we dont know how to stop. we see no other way of living than that which weve been using since we discovered agriculture. we produce to excess, not just what is required to survive. if you think inventing weaponry and continuing all our other destructive ways even after we know theyre destructive is progress then i suggest your reasoning is unsound.
and i disagree... saving species does not show we value life... it shows weve realised how destructive we are and were now looking for a way to somehow redeem ourselves for our actions. its like recycling... its just to make ourselves feel good whilst we continue to destroy the planet. a band aid if you will. if humans valued life, i mean truly valued life then wed live in eternal peace. dont fool yourself, humans are animals, were just a breed apart.
You can't uninvent something, so there will always be weapons. And saving a species does show we value life. How is it destructive that we are using resources from the earth. Do you blame the earth when a volocao erupts and devistates the ecosystem??? NO... then why to do you blame humans for using what is part of the earth for progress. We evolved form this earth it is here for our growth, Humans do, do terrible things but some things need to happen in order for you to live the lifestyle that you live by going to clubs drinking and listening to music and being detached from everything that lives the life of survival. If you are so again using resources, get off your computer and go live a primitive life you hypocrite. Walking
im not punishing humans. i dont even hate humans.. some of my favourite people are humans...im just asking questions. humans are not smart, humans have intelligence. theres a difference. quite often the decisions they make have enormous repercussions that im not sure they quite understand. we do not destroy the environment to survive, we do it cause we can and because we dont know how to stop. we see no other way of living than that which weve been using since we discovered agriculture. we produce to excess, not just what is required to survive. if you think inventing weaponry and continuing all our other destructive ways even after we know theyre destructive is progress then i suggest your reasoning is unsound.
and i disagree... saving species does not show we value life... it shows weve realised how destructive we are and were now looking for a way to somehow redeem ourselves for our actions. its like recycling... its just to make ourselves feel good whilst we continue to destroy the planet. a band aid if you will. if humans valued life, i mean truly valued life then wed live in eternal peace. dont fool yourself, humans are animals, were just a breed apart.
You can't uninvent something, so there will always be weapons. And saving a species does show we value life. How is it destructive that we are using resources from the earth. Do you blame the earth when a volocao erupts and devistates the ecosystem??? NO... then why to do you blame humans for using what is part of the earth for progress. We evolved form this earth it is here for our growth, Humans do, do terrible things but some things need to happen in order for you to live the lifestyle that you live by going to clubs drinking and listening to music and being detached from everything that lives the life of survival. If you are so again using resources, get off your computer and go live a primitive life you hypocrite. Walking
and right there is your problem. you think the earth was put here for the benefit of humans. if you cant see how incorrect that is then we have nothing else to discuss.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
The earth has been around roughly 4.5 billions years... the earliest sign of human life on earth was 2 -3 million years.. that's roughly less than 1% of the earth entire life's entire history. To put that in a realistic time frame, if the history of the earth is 1 year (365 days), humans have been around 4.8 hours. To think the earth is merely here for our use and purpose is exactly the mindset why we see mankind, society and the world in the shape it is in..pure selfishness and and extremely narrow minded beyond comprehension.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
i appreciate all the thought put into these posts. i am a little surprised it has taken a 'man vs animal' turn here, as that was not what my question was about at all...
some questions posed to those who have had a lot of negative things to say about humans (with which i do not necessarily disagree): do you think humans have no value? the same value as anything else in the natural universe? more? less?
(again i suppose it hinges on your definition of value, but whatever, just go with it.)
i agree, animals are not really capable of the greatest of human shortcomings. but, i believe, neither are animals capable of the greatest human accomplishments.
creative artistic expression, global social justice movements, philosophical discourse, questioning and seeking, charity, hope...
humans aren't perfect, but i believe they are certainly capable of great good.
ooh, i thought of some more:
kaleidoscopes
mathematics
baseball
toothbrushes
eyeglasses
science
bicycles
screen printing
the study of history
I don't know what has value compared to what doesn't, but I'm sure there's some type of hierarchy depending what values you deem significant. I think everything has value to some extent, but also don't think there's as much separation between them all as some would have you believe.
i appreciate all the thought put into these posts. i am a little surprised it has taken a 'man vs animal' turn here, as that was not what my question was about at all...
some questions posed to those who have had a lot of negative things to say about humans (with which i do not necessarily disagree): do you think humans have no value? the same value as anything else in the natural universe? more? less?
(again i suppose it hinges on your definition of value, but whatever, just go with it.)
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
In my opinion, the greatest accomplishments humans have offered are one's that either heal or explore... because those in my opinion are the two biggest area's which address some noble qualities.
i agree, animals are not really capable of the greatest of human shortcomings. but, i believe, neither are animals capable of the greatest human accomplishments.
creative artistic expression, global social justice movements, philosophical discourse, questioning and seeking, charity, hope...
humans aren't perfect, but i believe they are certainly capable of great good.
ooh, i thought of some more:
kaleidoscopes
mathematics
baseball
toothbrushes
eyeglasses
science
bicycles
screen printing
the study of history
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
i appreciate all the thought put into these posts. i am a little surprised it has taken a 'man vs animal' turn here, as that was not what my question was about at all...
some questions posed to those who have had a lot of negative things to say about humans (with which i do not necessarily disagree): do you think humans have no value? the same value as anything else in the natural universe? more? less?
(again i suppose it hinges on your definition of value, but whatever, just go with it.)
humans have as much value as anything else on this planet. or should i say everything on this planet is of equal value to humans. i do not believe generally speaking humans understand this. just because technology has afforded us ways to destroy the planet that does not mean we are of higher value than the creature that dams a river or chases down an antelope, the beetle that eats dung or the majestic primates whom many seem more than eager to distance themselves from. nor are we of anymore importance than the millions of plants that provide the medicines that keep us living longer and cure our diseases. the thing of most value is the planet itself. it is here to sustain us and the other billions of entities that inhabit it.
what i think is of less value is the culture that has allowed us to perpetuate such destruction, even after we know we are living wrong, upon the only home we will ever know. what kind of intelligent being destroys its home because it refuses to live any other way??
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i dont... not really. alls i know is everything on this planet is here because it belongs here. therefore everything is interrelated and of equal value. sure untold species are lost every year, usually due to the destruction of their habitats and yes humans reek havoc on the planet. unfortunately one day it will be time to pay the piper and for humans the cost will be their extinction.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
The earth has been around roughly 4.5 billions years... the earliest sign of human life on earth was 2 -3 million years.. that's roughly less than 1% of the earth entire life's entire history. To put that in a realistic time frame, if the history of the earth is 1 year (365 days), humans have been around 4.8 hours. To think the earth is merely here for our use and purpose is exactly the mindset why we see mankind, society and the world in the shape it is in..pure selfishness and and extremely narrow minded beyond comprehension.
The very reason one should not assess value. Though humans and animals do assess this value constantly. Humans in an emotional and/or pragmatic way (eg 'I offer more to society therefore I am of more value', 'this person comitted a crime therefore he/she is of less value than the law abiding person, 'I love this person therefore he/she is more valuable than the man on the street, etc.), animals by instinct (eg if not enough food, the runt of the litter does not get fed, in case of danger, the sick and meek get left behind).
i appreciate all the thought put into these posts. i am a little surprised it has taken a 'man vs animal' turn here, as that was not what my question was about at all...
some questions posed to those who have had a lot of negative things to say about humans (with which i do not necessarily disagree): do you think humans have no value? the same value as anything else in the natural universe? more? less?
(again i suppose it hinges on your definition of value, but whatever, just go with it.)
Of course that takes us back to the question of how we assess value. If we assessed the value of humanity relative to the value of the rest of the animal kingdom in the same way that we seem (based on such things as the death penalty) to assess the value of one human relative to another, I'd say we're of less value because we are destructive to the world and infringe upon the rights of every other living thing. We say the same of people who are destructive to society and infringe upon the rights of others by committing crimes.
On the other hand I disagree with this kind of assessment of the value of life. Just as I think that each individual's life has equal intrinsic value - and I therefore don't support the death penalty, war, etc. - I would also say that each species of animal, including humans, has equal intrinsic value.
The very reason one should not assess value. Though humans and animals do assess this value constantly. Humans in an emotional and/or pragmatic way (eg 'I offer more to society therefore I am of more value', 'this person comitted a crime therefore he/she is of less value than the law abiding person, 'I love this person therefore he/she is more valuable than the man on the street, etc.), animals by instinct (eg if not enough food, the runt of the litter does not get fed, in case of danger, the sick and meek get left behind).
i think its a mistake to attribute human concepts to animals.
i dont think animals assess value at all. they live by instinct(as you said) and the 'law of the jungle'. its survival of the fittest and if you cant keep up then youre gone.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
We'll be going back to the human/animal discussion :? Animals will not have the concept of value as I believe it's a concept us humans have 'created' to justify our place in society and our deeds. Concept based on morals, intellect, emotions and religion (to mention a few). I believe if we did not place ourselves on these ladders, we would not have been able to progress (in a good or bad way) as we have and been able to 'form' a working society (with laws, hierarchy, etc.). Again, whether one considers it good or bad.
We'll be going back to the human/animal discussion :? Animals will not have the concept of value as I believe it's a concept us humans have 'created' to justify our place in society and our deeds. Concept based on morals, intellect, emotions and religion (to mention a few). I believe if we did not place ourselves on these ladders, we would not have been able to progress (in a good or bad way) as we have and been able to 'form' a working society (with laws, hierarchy, etc.). Again, whether one considers it good or bad.
morals and laws are social constructs. and therefore imo cant be used to assess value, if one wanted to do such a thing.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
morals and laws are social constructs. and therefore imo cant be used to assess value, if one wanted to do such a thing.
I agree but those are some of the benchmarks we use. Humans, in general, need to know where they fit in, in relation to others, including other 'kingdoms' (and therefore 'assess' their value).
Ive said it once already and ill say it again - "You are describing issues in mankinds society and trying to identify it with an animals society who's whole purpose is to survive, you can't compare an animals primitive society to ours". Animals don't value life because they have no concept of what it means to value life, what they do is based on instinct and survival, and when they do something humans like to put a human emotion or tag on what they do. I don't understand the few that are bashing humanity for surviving (by using the earths resources) but yet if we witnessed an animal do the things we do we would recognize it as how inteligent they are. I don't know why some of you can't grasp the concept that what we are doing is part of our nature, we just attached morals to everything we do. For those saying the earth is not here for us, I understand that but where do you draw the line in terms of using the resources and destroying ecosystems? Building a house is destroying a house for some other species, same is walking on the grass you are destroying lives of alphids... Where does it end. Since when is survival about being nice?
can you tell me the secret of which god is the right one?
The whole world will be different soon... - EV
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
Comments
"Man's destiny was to conquer and rule the world, and this is what he's done.. almost. He hasn't quite made it, and it looks as though this may be his undoing. The problem is that man's conquest of the world has itself devastated the world. And in spite of all the mastery we've attained, we don't have enough mastery to stop devastating the world.. or to repair the devastation we've already wrought."— Daniel Quinn
[/quote]
Since morality is subjective.[/quote]
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Future earning potential isn't the only way the economic value of human life is calculated. I think this is mostly used when deciding what the payout should be in the case of wrongfull death.
Another way involves asking people what they would be willing to pay to reduce their risk of death, for instance. These kinds of calculations inform cost-benefit analyses that are used to determine what safety measures companies must take to protect their workers, for instance. Once you start getting into a situation where the safety measures would cost more to implement than the economic value of the lives they would save, then they say the safety measures are not justified. (I'm sure that's quite comforting to the families of the people who die.)
They still only take what they can use. They don't stockpile a surplus of antelope for themselves, that they'll never be able to eat, while most of the rest of their species starves.
Yes... people are de-valued in order to make it easier treat them as animals, rather than humans.
During wartime... the enemy is reduced to a sub-human evil... it justifies killing them.
And we do not need to looks any further than our own southern border to see an example of this.
Hail, Hail!!!
im not punishing humans. i dont even hate humans.. some of my favourite people are humans...im just asking questions. humans are not smart, humans have intelligence. theres a difference. quite often the decisions they make have enormous repercussions that im not sure they quite understand. we do not destroy the environment to survive, we do it cause we can and because we dont know how to stop. we see no other way of living than that which weve been using since we discovered agriculture. we produce to excess, not just what is required to survive. if you think inventing weaponry and continuing all our other destructive ways even after we know theyre destructive is progress then i suggest your reasoning is unsound.
and i disagree... saving species does not show we value life... it shows weve realised how destructive we are and were now looking for a way to somehow redeem ourselves for our actions. its like recycling... its just to make ourselves feel good whilst we continue to destroy the planet. a band aid if you will. if humans valued life, i mean truly valued life then wed live in eternal peace. dont fool yourself, humans are animals, were just a breed apart.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
and right there is your problem. you think the earth was put here for the benefit of humans. if you cant see how incorrect that is then we have nothing else to discuss.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
same reason the other planets are.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
because God said so.
Godfather.
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
some questions posed to those who have had a lot of negative things to say about humans (with which i do not necessarily disagree): do you think humans have no value? the same value as anything else in the natural universe? more? less?
(again i suppose it hinges on your definition of value, but whatever, just go with it.)
ooh, i thought of some more:
kaleidoscopes
mathematics
baseball
toothbrushes
eyeglasses
science
bicycles
screen printing
the study of history
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
humans have as much value as anything else on this planet. or should i say everything on this planet is of equal value to humans. i do not believe generally speaking humans understand this. just because technology has afforded us ways to destroy the planet that does not mean we are of higher value than the creature that dams a river or chases down an antelope, the beetle that eats dung or the majestic primates whom many seem more than eager to distance themselves from. nor are we of anymore importance than the millions of plants that provide the medicines that keep us living longer and cure our diseases. the thing of most value is the planet itself. it is here to sustain us and the other billions of entities that inhabit it.
what i think is of less value is the culture that has allowed us to perpetuate such destruction, even after we know we are living wrong, upon the only home we will ever know. what kind of intelligent being destroys its home because it refuses to live any other way??
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i dont... not really. alls i know is everything on this planet is here because it belongs here. therefore everything is interrelated and of equal value. sure untold species are lost every year, usually due to the destruction of their habitats and yes humans reek havoc on the planet. unfortunately one day it will be time to pay the piper and for humans the cost will be their extinction.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
EXCELLENT post! :thumbup:
[
The very reason one should not assess value. Though humans and animals do assess this value constantly. Humans in an emotional and/or pragmatic way (eg 'I offer more to society therefore I am of more value', 'this person comitted a crime therefore he/she is of less value than the law abiding person, 'I love this person therefore he/she is more valuable than the man on the street, etc.), animals by instinct (eg if not enough food, the runt of the litter does not get fed, in case of danger, the sick and meek get left behind).
Of course that takes us back to the question of how we assess value. If we assessed the value of humanity relative to the value of the rest of the animal kingdom in the same way that we seem (based on such things as the death penalty) to assess the value of one human relative to another, I'd say we're of less value because we are destructive to the world and infringe upon the rights of every other living thing. We say the same of people who are destructive to society and infringe upon the rights of others by committing crimes.
On the other hand I disagree with this kind of assessment of the value of life. Just as I think that each individual's life has equal intrinsic value - and I therefore don't support the death penalty, war, etc. - I would also say that each species of animal, including humans, has equal intrinsic value.
i think its a mistake to attribute human concepts to animals.
i dont think animals assess value at all. they live by instinct(as you said) and the 'law of the jungle'. its survival of the fittest and if you cant keep up then youre gone.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
morals and laws are social constructs. and therefore imo cant be used to assess value, if one wanted to do such a thing.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I agree but those are some of the benchmarks we use. Humans, in general, need to know where they fit in, in relation to others, including other 'kingdoms' (and therefore 'assess' their value).
then you better make sure you choose wisley then.
there is only one true God.
Godfather.
can you tell me the secret of which god is the right one?
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13